Exploring the Removal of Secular and Socialist Words from India's Constitution
The question of whether India should remove secular and socialist words from its constitution has been a topic of much debate. These words were added to the Preamble as part of the 42nd amendment in 1976, during a period of political turmoil and change. This amendment was introduced by a government whose term had expired, and it was approved in 1977, amidst a political landscape marked by significant events.
The Background of the 42nd Amendment
The addition of the words ldquo;secularrdquo; and ldquo;socialistrdquo; to the Preamble was part of a broader set of amendments known as the 42nd amendment of the Constitution of India. These changes were made during a time when the countryrsquo;s political climate was quite volatile. The amendment was brought about at the behest of a Prime Minister whose election had recently been disqualified.
The 42nd amendment is notable because it significantly altered the Indian Constitution, impacting not only the Preamble but also various Fundamental Rights. While the amendment was later amended by the 44th amendment in 1978, the debate around the need to reverse the 42nd amendment continues. Interestingly, the 42nd amendment could be simply reversed by a presidential order, but the question remains as to whether this action is necessary or even beneficial.
The Significance of Secularism and Socialism in a Republic
Even if the words ldquo;secularrdquo; and ldquo;socialistrdquo; are removed from the Preamble, their impact on the constitution would remain nominal. According to T. S. Thakur, former Chief Justice of India, a republic inherently includes secularism and socialism as part of its fundamental structure. Therefore, any social and economic policy made by the government must be based on these principles.
A republicrsquo;s definition includes the maintenance of these substrates, and attempts to change them would likely face significant legal and political challenges. In the same vein, the Indian Constitution declares India as a republic, a status that is fundamentally different from both theocracy and a failed banana state. Thus, the removal of these words would not fundamentally alter the constitutional framework.
The Role of the Supreme Court in Constitutional Amendments
The role of the Supreme Court in the process of constitutional amendments is also crucial. While the Supreme Court initially held the Preamble as not being part of the constitution in the Berubari case of 1960, this view was later overruled in the Keshavanand Bharti case of 1973. In this landmark case, the Supreme Court decided that the Preamble is indeed a part of the constitution and that any part of the constitution can be amended under Article 368, with the exception of basic features.
Despite the Supreme Courtrsquo;s recognition of the Preamble as part of the constitution, it has not explicitly stated that the Preamble and Fundamental Rights are basic features. This has led to the 42nd and 44th amendments, which altered the Preamble and Fundamental Rights, respectively. The Supreme Court did not intervene to strike down these amendments.
Minerva Mills Case and the Current Status
The Minerva Mills case of 1980 further affirmed the principle that the power of judicial review cannot be taken away while exercising the power of amendment by Parliament. Since then, the status quo has been maintained, with no attempts made to amend the constitution to remove the basic features, including the Preamble and Fundamental Rights. The question of whether to change either the Preamble or any other basic features arises when considering the balance between constitutional stability and political convenience.
Many politicians have realized that without altering the constitution, they can still exert significant power. The concept of an ldquo;undeclared emergencyrdquo; has been floated, raising questions about the need to modify the constitutional framework. The removal of the words ldquo;secularrdquo; and ldquo;socialistrdquo; from the Preamble would be akin to changing the national anthem, as it would no longer accurately reflect the countryrsquo;s current socio-political climate.
The current slogan, ldquo;India is a republic, I shall keep stressing this again and again,rdquo; underscores the importance of maintaining the constitutional integrity of the country. A republicrsquo;s foundations are deeply rooted in secularism and socialism, which cannot be easily altered without significant legal and political challenges.